I've asked this question before but got no answer for it.what if William marries a girl whith a religion out of christionary?then he wouldnt be able to marry in church and have the religious ceremonies and his children would be considered as illigitimates so cannot succeed the throne!!!!

I know the Queen doesn't want them to marry a Catholic.English law forbids that a Catholic take the throne but I have heard that it could change if Parliament wants it to but that has yet to be seen.My personal feeling is that Catholics should still be refused the crown. (This is my personal feeling do not take offense. You can disagree but please no personal attacks)

If the Queen wanted Catholics on the throne she would've made steps to do so. Even if the law goes threw I highly doubt we will see a Catholic on the throne in our lifetime.

I don't think the children would be considered illegitimate as long as he was married to the mother but he may forfeit the crown. I am sure the Queen has made her wishes for William known to him and Charles.
If she was a non-religious person I am sure they would want her to put on a good show but other than that is anyones guess.

Cute Girl: Prince William, or anyone in line to the British throne, may, with permission of the monarch, marry anyone of any religion, other than Catholicism and not lose their place in the line of succession. It is merely Catholics who are discriminated against here. Theoretically, a Muslim, Buddhist or Jewish young lady could be the next Princess of Wales, but not a Catholic, under current law.

Details have been released of a private conversation in which Britain's Prince of Wales expressed his desire to see the Church of England disestablished as the state church, and the possibility of a Catholic monarch.

Details have been released of a private conversation in which Britain's Prince of Wales expressed his desire to see the Church of England disestablished as the state church, and the possibility of a Catholic monarch.

The Daily Telegraph has published details of the conversation which took place five years ago with Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown, then leader of the Opposition Tony Blair, and Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks.

The paper says Ashdown's diary records the Prince asking Sacks: "Are you making an argument for disestablishment?" Mr Ashdown intervened: "Yes, of course, he is and he's right." Mr Ashdown then records: "Charles looked at me, smiled broadly and said, 'I really can't think why we can't have Catholics on the throne'."A St James's Palace spokesman said on Monday night: "Obviously it was a private conversation and sounds to me as if it was a quiet aside. But the Prince has always had a strong sense of the country being for all faiths."

Cute Girl: Prince William, or anyone in line to the British throne, may, with permission of the monarch, marry anyone of any religion, other than Catholicism and not lose their place in the line of succession. It is merely Catholics who are discriminated against here. Theoretically, a Muslim, Buddhist or Jewish young lady could be the next Princess of Wales, but not a Catholic, under current law.

To understand this law you need to understand the religious and political context in which it was passed.

It is part of the Act of Settlement of 1701.

In the early 1500s the vast majority of Europeans were Roman Catholic in faith with a very small minority of Jews. No one really claimed to be non-religious.

In the early 1500s various people, including Martin Luther, challenged the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. In England Henry VIII argued in support of the Pope and Roman Catholicism for which the Pope of the day rewarded him with the title Defender of the Faith (a title still held by the Queen today).

In the 1530s Henry VIII split from the Roman Catholic Church, ostensibly over the right to divorce his wife to get a male heir but also due to his desire to acquire the wealth of the church naming this church as the Church in England. He was actually bankrupt so the wealth of the church was an attractive proposition.

When he died his son establised the Church of England but his sister tried to return the English to Roman Catholicism. Elizabeth I then established her religious settlement which established the Church of England as the church of the country.

In the 1600 the Stuarts were more in tune with the Roman Catholic Church, especially Charles I, who lost his head one January morning and his second son James II.

The majority of the people however had been converted to the Church of England and were fearful of a return to the authority of Roman Catholicism.

When James II succeeded to the throne his heirs were his two daughters and all seemed well as these two young ladies were definitely Anglican. Had James not remarried and his wife had a son he may very well have remained on the throne.

However when the son was born the people in power feared a return to Roman Catholicism with an RC king and an heir that would be raised in that faith. These men then forced James to flee and to take his son with him. This is the famous Glorious Revolution of 1688.

The parliament then invited James' eldest daughter Mary II to become Queen and she shared the throne with her husband William III. When they both died the younger daughter became Queen as Queen Anne.

During her reign she had many children but none survived childhood so the government had to decide on a successor. One thing they didn't want was a Roman Catholic as fear of the power of the Pope interferring in the government was still quite strong. They decided to pass an act that passed the throne to the next non-Roman Catholic heir - the Electress Sophie of Hannover.

Religion was still very important to people and their were all sorts of restrictions placed on Roman Catholics such as they couldn't be members of Parliament or officers in the army. These restrictions were lifted in the 1820s.

I believe there were 57 or so people with better claims to the throne than her but they were Roman Catholic.

In addition they didn't want a repeat of the situation in 1688 or the 1630s and 1640s where the Queen Consort was Roman Catholic and therefore any heir would possibly be raised in that faith so they included a clause that said that anyone marrying a Roman Catholic, or converting to Roman Catholicism was to be ineligible for the throne.

It was a long time ago but is still an active Act of Parliament as it has seen Prince Michael of Kent and one or two of his nephews relinquish their place in the succession due to their marriage or conversion.

At the time in which the Act was passed it was not conceived that a Christian would marry a non-Christian which is why today William etc can marry a Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Satanist etc and not lose their position in the succession but marriage to a Roman Catholic would cost them that position.

Personally I think the Act needs to be modified but....

Sorry if this seems long winded but as an history teacher by trade I think understanding the historical context is easier than simply being told this is the case without a real explanation behind it.

I know the Queen doesn't want them to marry a Catholic.English law forbids that a Catholic take the throne but I have heard that it could change if Parliament wants it to but that has yet to be seen.My personal feeling is that Catholics should still be refused the crown. (This is my personal feeling do not take offense. You can disagree but please no personal attacks)

If the Queen wanted Catholics on the throne she would've made steps to do so. Even if the law goes threw I highly doubt we will see a Catholic on the throne in our lifetime.

I don't think the children would be considered illegitimate as long as he was married to the mother but he may forfeit the crown. I am sure the Queen has made her wishes for William known to him and Charles.
If she was a non-religious person I am sure they would want her to put on a good show but other than that is anyones guess.

i agree with you!

but mostly Royals who have religions same as catholic or whatsoever who is grew-up as childhood! but mostly Royals been grew as catholic!

i think i would agree with HM Queen what she wanted for William and Harry getting married with British girls than Paris Hiltons because William is future King of England he would still search for perfect brides than Paris Hilton! mostly British people who grew-up as Catholic or non-catholic.

i want him to marry paris so all those stupid royal rules would go down the drain

not your choice!

its would William's choice to search for perfect brides in England or whatsoever! if he wanted still search for future Queen of England because he is future King of England but let him choose he is ADULT!

William would chose for as wife in England or whatsoever! because he is future King of England mostly Royals who would become King nor become Queen after their parents who died or grandparents but William not have girlfriend but he have roommates in Scotland her name is Kate Middleton but she moved out.

his grandmother is currently Queen of England and head of state but i think William would let him chose whatsoever girls who knows who friends of his family's they can dating or dont!